The House Energy and Natural Resources Committee convened on January 31, 2025, to discuss proposed amendments to House Bill 1579, which aims to regulate the addition of large power loads to electric cooperatives in North Dakota. The meeting featured testimony from several cooperative leaders who expressed strong opposition to the bill, arguing that it would impose unnecessary regulatory burdens and hinder their ability to manage energy demands effectively.

Key discussions centered around the current processes cooperatives use to evaluate and integrate new power loads. Todd Seiler, Vice President of Minn Kota Power Cooperative, emphasized the complexity and thoroughness of their planning processes, which ensure reliability and affordability for their members. He noted that the proposed amendments would shift decision-making authority to the Public Service Commission (PSC), potentially undermining the cooperatives' governance and operational expertise.

Matt Hanson, CEO of McKinsey Electric Cooperative, echoed these concerns, highlighting the cooperative's successful management of significant load growth in the Bakken region without negatively impacting existing members. He argued that the proposed regulatory changes would complicate an already lengthy process, which typically takes five to seven years to build new infrastructure. Hanson stressed that existing regulations are sufficient and that additional oversight could delay necessary developments.

Alex Voorness, General Manager of Montreux Williams Electric Cooperative, also opposed the bill, asserting that the congestion issues cited by the PSC were not solely due to new loads but rather a result of broader market dynamics and insufficient investment by investor-owned utilities. He pointed out that cooperatives have invested over $2 billion in infrastructure to support growth in the region, demonstrating their commitment to meeting energy demands responsibly.

The committee members engaged with the speakers, seeking clarity on the implications of the proposed amendments. Questions focused on the potential delays in infrastructure development and the existing communication processes among cooperatives and regulatory bodies.

In conclusion, the testimonies presented a unified front against House Bill 1579, with cooperative leaders urging the committee to reject the proposed amendments. They argued that the current regulatory framework is adequate for managing load growth and that additional regulations would only serve to complicate and slow down necessary energy infrastructure projects in North Dakota. The committee is expected to deliberate further on the bill's implications for the state's energy landscape.